The first time I heard about Ken Norton, people were talking about him like he was just an ordinary enough fighter who got lucky against Ali, but since then the more I've seen of him the better I think he was. What does the classic think of him? How would he face up against other legends?
For boxers who liked to jab, he is a nightmare. Against strong, hard hitting, agressive fighters, he has his hands full (and usually his chin aswell). No matter who you are you need to be an exceptional fighter to beat Ken Norton.
Yeah, pretty much In order to leave a ring with Ken Norton, having your arms raised in victory, you basically either needed to be a world class technician such as Ali and Holmes, or a puncher of legendary proportions like a Foreman, Shavers or Cooney. Anything in between wouldn't have my confidence at having a very good night against Norton.
If he were like Ali in the sense that he grew up with boxing as his goal, this guy would be considered a legend by all. But he had a much more shrewd, economical career in boxing. He probably was the most all-around athletically talented HW champ in history. He could have professionally competed in numerous sports- football, baseball, track, etc. Reading his autobiography gave a very good sense of how he differed from the other three biggest/bigger names of his time and division. Plus, if you look at it, Foreman, Frazier and Ali-all gold medalist Olympians. All had that highest amateur achievement. Norton did kind of come out of nowhere and was always the underrated guy who much of the time after his first fight with Ali, half-heartedly boxed, IMO. Considering this nature, it's somewhat of a lucky thing he actually got a title attached to his record, considering Ali made off like a bandit with 2 of 3 and didn't want to do it yet again. I'm glad he did finally get a title, even though it wasn't under ideal circumstances.
Ken Norton was a class heavyweight,and make no mistake. A lot has been made of his Achilles Heel,losing to big punchers,but I doubt whether just ANY big puncher could have beaten him in his prime. He came along during heavyweight boxing's golden age,the 70's,and I would rate him the fourth best boxer of that decade,just behind Ali,Foreman and Frazier respectively. I'd rate Larry Holmes ahead of him on an overall basis,but for that decade,I'd put Larry one place behind him,as I base my ratings on achievement,as much as anything else,and Holmes did n't come into prominence until 1978.
Agreed, Norton would have been a top player in any era, and perhaps even the #1 guy in some of the weaker ones.
